Thursday, April 18, 2013
Retired Supreme Court Justice O'Connor visits SC
Issues dealing with church and state will always be among the toughest the nation's courts deal with and there's no easy test for deciding them, former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said Monday.
"Religious pluralism lies at the very heart of the American political tradition and I think it remains a major concern as our country becomes ever more the home of larger and larger communities of people from widely different ethnic and religious backgrounds," the first woman appointed to the high court told a legal symposium focusing on a constitutional test she proposed in a high court ruling almost 30 years ago.
Monday, April 8, 2013
High court poised to upend civil rights policies
Has the nation lived down its history of racism and should the law become colorblind?
Addressing two pivotal legal issues, one on affirmative action and a second on voting rights, a divided Supreme Court is poised to answer those questions.
In one case, the issue is whether race preferences in university admissions undermine equal opportunity more than they promote the benefits of racial diversity. Just this past week, justices signaled their interest in scrutinizing affirmative action very intensely, expanding their review as well to a Michigan law passed by voters that bars "preferential treatment" to students based on race. Separately in a second case, the court must decide whether race relations - in the South, particularly - have improved to the point that federal laws protecting minority voting rights are no longer warranted.
The questions are apt as the United States closes in on a demographic tipping point, when nonwhites will become a majority of the nation's population for the first time. That dramatic shift is expected to be reached within the next generation, and how the Supreme Court rules could go a long way in determining what civil rights and equality mean in an America long divided by race.
The court's five conservative justices seem ready to declare a new post-racial moment, pointing to increased levels of voter registration and turnout among blacks to show that the South has changed. Lower federal courts just in the past year had seen things differently, blunting voter ID laws and other election restrictions passed by GOP-controlled legislatures in South Carolina, Texas and Florida, which they saw as discriminatory.
Addressing two pivotal legal issues, one on affirmative action and a second on voting rights, a divided Supreme Court is poised to answer those questions.
In one case, the issue is whether race preferences in university admissions undermine equal opportunity more than they promote the benefits of racial diversity. Just this past week, justices signaled their interest in scrutinizing affirmative action very intensely, expanding their review as well to a Michigan law passed by voters that bars "preferential treatment" to students based on race. Separately in a second case, the court must decide whether race relations - in the South, particularly - have improved to the point that federal laws protecting minority voting rights are no longer warranted.
The questions are apt as the United States closes in on a demographic tipping point, when nonwhites will become a majority of the nation's population for the first time. That dramatic shift is expected to be reached within the next generation, and how the Supreme Court rules could go a long way in determining what civil rights and equality mean in an America long divided by race.
The court's five conservative justices seem ready to declare a new post-racial moment, pointing to increased levels of voter registration and turnout among blacks to show that the South has changed. Lower federal courts just in the past year had seen things differently, blunting voter ID laws and other election restrictions passed by GOP-controlled legislatures in South Carolina, Texas and Florida, which they saw as discriminatory.
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
Gerald B. McNamara - DUI Defense
Based on my experience as a former police officer, my team of attorneys has a unique understanding of what you have experienced if you have been arrested for driving after imbibing alcohol or utilizing drugs in Pennsylvania (which is more commonly known as driving under the influence, or simply DUI). We realize that for many people arrested for DUI, this is their first and only encounter with the criminal justice system. If you are reading this, you probably realize that this is not a very pleasant encounter.
http://www.gbmlawpittsburgh.com/criminal-defense/dui/defending-your-case
http://www.gbmlawpittsburgh.com/criminal-defense/dui/defending-your-case
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Colo. theater shooting lawyers head back to court
Prosecutors and defense lawyers in the Colorado theater shooting will head back to court Wednesday in advance of a crucial hearing in the case.
State District Judge William B. Sylvester has told both sides to appear before him to make sure everything is ready for next week's preliminary hearing, when prosecutors will outline their case against the defendant, James Holmes.
At the conclusion of the preliminary hearing, Sylvester will decide if the evidence is sufficient to put Holmes on trial.
Holmes is charged with killing 12 people and wounding 70 on July 20 in a movie theater in the Denver suburb of Aurora. Prosecutors say he opened fire during a midnight showing of the Batman movie "The Dark Night Rises."
Holmes faces multiple counts of first-degree murder and attempted murder and hasn't yet entered a plea. His lawyers have said he suffers from mental illness.
The preliminary hearing, which starts Monday, will give the public its first officially sanctioned look at much of the evidence against Holmes.
Sylvester imposed a gag order shortly after Holmes' arrest barring attorneys and investigators from speaking publicly about the case, and many documents have been sealed.
The University of Colorado, where Holmes was a graduate student, has also been tight-lipped about the case.
State District Judge William B. Sylvester has told both sides to appear before him to make sure everything is ready for next week's preliminary hearing, when prosecutors will outline their case against the defendant, James Holmes.
At the conclusion of the preliminary hearing, Sylvester will decide if the evidence is sufficient to put Holmes on trial.
Holmes is charged with killing 12 people and wounding 70 on July 20 in a movie theater in the Denver suburb of Aurora. Prosecutors say he opened fire during a midnight showing of the Batman movie "The Dark Night Rises."
Holmes faces multiple counts of first-degree murder and attempted murder and hasn't yet entered a plea. His lawyers have said he suffers from mental illness.
The preliminary hearing, which starts Monday, will give the public its first officially sanctioned look at much of the evidence against Holmes.
Sylvester imposed a gag order shortly after Holmes' arrest barring attorneys and investigators from speaking publicly about the case, and many documents have been sealed.
The University of Colorado, where Holmes was a graduate student, has also been tight-lipped about the case.
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Jordan court postpones verdict of ex-spy chief
A Jordanian criminal court says it has postponed a verdict in the case of a powerful former intelligence chief on trial for alleged embezzlement of public funds, money laundering and abuse of office.
Presiding judge Nashaat Akhras told Mohammed al-Dahabi in court Sunday that his verdict will be pronounced Nov. 11, without giving a reason.
Al-Dahabi ran the General Intelligence Department between 2005 and 2008.
He faces up to 15 years in jail if convicted.
He was arrested in February, when inspectors from the Central Bank of Jordan suspected transactions worth millions of dollars had gone through his bank account.
The rare case against such a high profile official is meant to show Jordan's seriousness in efforts to tackle graft and corruption — a demand voiced in recent street protests.
Presiding judge Nashaat Akhras told Mohammed al-Dahabi in court Sunday that his verdict will be pronounced Nov. 11, without giving a reason.
Al-Dahabi ran the General Intelligence Department between 2005 and 2008.
He faces up to 15 years in jail if convicted.
He was arrested in February, when inspectors from the Central Bank of Jordan suspected transactions worth millions of dollars had gone through his bank account.
The rare case against such a high profile official is meant to show Jordan's seriousness in efforts to tackle graft and corruption — a demand voiced in recent street protests.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Palm Beach Construction Law Attorney
Palm Beach Construction Law is a firm combining construction and the law. Our Principal is both a Board Certified Construction Attorney and a Florida Licensed Professional Engineer. Attorney Heitman knows the language of the construction jobsite and can bring his knowledge to the boardroom and the courtroom. His experience in both fields gives him an advantage to handle your case with the highest quality and efficiency.
We hold our standards very high and our work is plumb, square and level.
When we say plumb, that means we will be straightforward with you. There is no beating around the bush and we will evaluate your case and tell you where you are legally, which will help you make better decisions for the future of your business. When we say square, it means we will do whatever it takes to protect our client's legal rights whether is it is resolving your construction disputes or assiting you in drafting your contracts. Lastly, when we say level it means that our law firm will treat all clients with the same high quality legal representation.
Heitman Law Firm, PL is a reliable and professional construction law firm. With many years of experience in the field, Attorney Heitman will give you the client service of the highest quality and efficiency. To contact him for a consultation, call (561) 249-2879 and visit them on the web at http://www.palmbeachconstructionlaw.org/disputes-contracts
We hold our standards very high and our work is plumb, square and level.
When we say plumb, that means we will be straightforward with you. There is no beating around the bush and we will evaluate your case and tell you where you are legally, which will help you make better decisions for the future of your business. When we say square, it means we will do whatever it takes to protect our client's legal rights whether is it is resolving your construction disputes or assiting you in drafting your contracts. Lastly, when we say level it means that our law firm will treat all clients with the same high quality legal representation.
Heitman Law Firm, PL is a reliable and professional construction law firm. With many years of experience in the field, Attorney Heitman will give you the client service of the highest quality and efficiency. To contact him for a consultation, call (561) 249-2879 and visit them on the web at http://www.palmbeachconstructionlaw.org/disputes-contracts
Monday, August 6, 2012
New DC drunken driving law to take effect
A new law that toughens penalties for drunken driving in the nation's capital takes effect Wednesday, but the city's police department still is not using breath tests on suspected drunken drivers more than a year after the tests were suspended.
The new law, which was approved by the D.C. Council and signed by Mayor Vincent Gray earlier this summer. It doubles mandatory minimum jail terms for people with blood-alcohol concentrations of .20 percent or higher and establishes a blood-alcohol limit of .04 percent for commercial drivers, including taxi drivers.
The law also establishes new oversight for the district's breath-testing program. But there's still no timetable to the resumption of breath tests, which D.C. police stopped using in February 2011 in the wake of revelations that their breath-testing devices had produced inaccurate results. Police have been using urine and blood tests instead.
A year earlier, District of Columbia officials had notified defense lawyers about nearly 400 drunken-driving convictions that relied, at least party, on inaccurately calibrated blood-alcohol tests.
More than two dozen people sued the district over convictions based on those flawed tests, and the district Attorney General's office said Tuesday that all the outstanding lawsuits had been settled. The district paid a total of $136,000 to 17 plaintiffs, with individuals receiving between $2,000 and $42,000, said Jeffrey Rhodes, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.
The new law, which was approved by the D.C. Council and signed by Mayor Vincent Gray earlier this summer. It doubles mandatory minimum jail terms for people with blood-alcohol concentrations of .20 percent or higher and establishes a blood-alcohol limit of .04 percent for commercial drivers, including taxi drivers.
The law also establishes new oversight for the district's breath-testing program. But there's still no timetable to the resumption of breath tests, which D.C. police stopped using in February 2011 in the wake of revelations that their breath-testing devices had produced inaccurate results. Police have been using urine and blood tests instead.
A year earlier, District of Columbia officials had notified defense lawyers about nearly 400 drunken-driving convictions that relied, at least party, on inaccurately calibrated blood-alcohol tests.
More than two dozen people sued the district over convictions based on those flawed tests, and the district Attorney General's office said Tuesday that all the outstanding lawsuits had been settled. The district paid a total of $136,000 to 17 plaintiffs, with individuals receiving between $2,000 and $42,000, said Jeffrey Rhodes, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)